Cost-Benefit analysis of urban nature-based solutions: A systematic review of approaches and scales with a focus on benefit valuation

IF 6.1 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ECOLOGY
Alessia Chelli , Luke Brander , Davide Geneletti
{"title":"Cost-Benefit analysis of urban nature-based solutions: A systematic review of approaches and scales with a focus on benefit valuation","authors":"Alessia Chelli ,&nbsp;Luke Brander ,&nbsp;Davide Geneletti","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoser.2024.101684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Urban nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly recognized as an effective strategy to address urban sustainability challenges. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is a widely used method for assessing the economic feasibility of NBS interventions and supporting decision-makers in comparing different investment alternatives. Performing a CBA, however, is complex and requires making methodological choices and assumptions, such as choosing the discount rate and the temporal horizon, which can significantly affect the outcome estimates. Moreover, the inclusion of the full range of costs and benefits can be challenging due to difficulties and uncertainties in estimating their monetary value and accounting for their spatial and temporal dynamics. The objective of this research is to critically analyze current applications of CBA on urban NBS in the scientific literature, identifying trends, limitations, and research gaps. To achieve this, we conducted a systematic review of articles published between 2000 and 2022, resulting in 114 observations of CBAs for urban NBS. The review compared CBA approaches and scales, focusing on the monetary valuation of costs and benefits, as well as the spatial and temporal dynamics of benefits. Our results indicate a predominance of CBAs with a social, as opposed to private, perspective, and with a focus on building solutions and small-scale NBS interventions. Moreover, we found a general lack of consideration for environmental externalities among the costs, and an incomplete inclusion of the full range of benefits, often due to difficulties in estimating their monetary values. We also found that CBA studies usually do not consider the variability in NBS performance over time. Finally, most studies reported a positive CBA outcome, suggesting that NBS are generally economically advantageous.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51312,"journal":{"name":"Ecosystem Services","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 101684"},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecosystem Services","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041624000913","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Urban nature-based solutions (NBS) are increasingly recognized as an effective strategy to address urban sustainability challenges. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is a widely used method for assessing the economic feasibility of NBS interventions and supporting decision-makers in comparing different investment alternatives. Performing a CBA, however, is complex and requires making methodological choices and assumptions, such as choosing the discount rate and the temporal horizon, which can significantly affect the outcome estimates. Moreover, the inclusion of the full range of costs and benefits can be challenging due to difficulties and uncertainties in estimating their monetary value and accounting for their spatial and temporal dynamics. The objective of this research is to critically analyze current applications of CBA on urban NBS in the scientific literature, identifying trends, limitations, and research gaps. To achieve this, we conducted a systematic review of articles published between 2000 and 2022, resulting in 114 observations of CBAs for urban NBS. The review compared CBA approaches and scales, focusing on the monetary valuation of costs and benefits, as well as the spatial and temporal dynamics of benefits. Our results indicate a predominance of CBAs with a social, as opposed to private, perspective, and with a focus on building solutions and small-scale NBS interventions. Moreover, we found a general lack of consideration for environmental externalities among the costs, and an incomplete inclusion of the full range of benefits, often due to difficulties in estimating their monetary values. We also found that CBA studies usually do not consider the variability in NBS performance over time. Finally, most studies reported a positive CBA outcome, suggesting that NBS are generally economically advantageous.
基于城市自然的解决方案的成本效益分析:以效益评估为重点的方法和尺度的系统回顾
基于城市自然的解决方案(NBS)越来越被认为是应对城市可持续性挑战的有效战略。成本效益分析(CBA)是一种广泛使用的方法,用于评估国家统计局干预措施的经济可行性,并支持决策者比较不同的投资方案。然而,执行CBA是复杂的,需要做出方法学上的选择和假设,例如选择贴现率和时间范围,这可能会显著影响结果估计。此外,由于在估计其货币价值和计算其空间和时间动态方面存在困难和不确定性,因此将所有成本和收益纳入其中可能具有挑战性。本研究的目的是批判性地分析当前科学文献中CBA在城市人口统计中的应用,识别趋势、局限性和研究空白。为了实现这一目标,我们对2000年至2022年间发表的文章进行了系统回顾,得出了114份城市NBS的cba观察结果。本文比较了CBA的方法和尺度,重点讨论了成本和效益的货币评估,以及效益的时空动态。我们的研究结果表明,cba的优势在于具有社会视角,而不是私人视角,并且侧重于构建解决方案和小规模的NBS干预。此外,我们发现在成本中普遍缺乏对环境外部性的考虑,并且不完整地包括所有利益,这通常是由于难以估计其货币价值。我们还发现,CBA研究通常不考虑NBS表现随时间的变化。最后,大多数研究报告了积极的CBA结果,表明NBS通常具有经济优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ecosystem Services
Ecosystem Services ECOLOGYENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES&-ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
CiteScore
14.90
自引率
7.90%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: Ecosystem Services is an international, interdisciplinary journal that is associated with the Ecosystem Services Partnership (ESP). The journal is dedicated to exploring the science, policy, and practice related to ecosystem services, which are the various ways in which ecosystems contribute to human well-being, both directly and indirectly. Ecosystem Services contributes to the broader goal of ensuring that the benefits of ecosystems are recognized, valued, and sustainably managed for the well-being of current and future generations. The journal serves as a platform for scholars, practitioners, policymakers, and other stakeholders to share their findings and insights, fostering collaboration and innovation in the field of ecosystem services.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信